2020
DOI: 10.1080/02813432.2020.1847827
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selection bias in general practice research: analysis in a cohort of pregnant Danish women

Abstract: Objective: The aim of the present study was to examine selection in a general practice-based pregnancy cohort. Design: Survey linked to administrative register data. Setting and subjects: In spring 2015, GPs were recruited from two Danish regions. They were asked to invite all pregnant women in their practice who had their first prenatal care visit before 15 August 2016 to participate in the survey. Outcome measures: The characteristics of GPs and the pregnant women were compared at each step in the recruitmen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

5
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We sampled GPs from two representative regions of Denmark, including urban and rural areas, as well as areas with low and high social status and income. This strengthens the geographical and socioeconomic representation, but the GPs could choose not to participate, and the participating GPs might not have asked all eligible women [ 48 ]. While this selection bias may have affected estimates of prevalence, it is less likely to have affected the associations investigated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We sampled GPs from two representative regions of Denmark, including urban and rural areas, as well as areas with low and high social status and income. This strengthens the geographical and socioeconomic representation, but the GPs could choose not to participate, and the participating GPs might not have asked all eligible women [ 48 ]. While this selection bias may have affected estimates of prevalence, it is less likely to have affected the associations investigated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the fact that characteristics were overall well balanced between groups indicates that this bias was minimal; we also adjusted for imbalanced variables to mitigate their influence on the estimate. Third, health professionals may have selected compliant participants, thereby inducing selection bias [ 68 ]. However, this limitation would have affected both the intervention and control groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study offered a unique opportunity to identify the source population, because almost all pregnant women in Denmark contact their GP in early pregnancy, and first pregnancy consultations are registered in a national database based on reimbursement data provided by GPs 35 . Great effort was put into recruiting and obtaining responses from the pregnant women, and no exclusion criteria were used in recruitment 35 . A recruitment bias might be present, as the GPs might not have recruited all available women, and women who did not read Danish well might not have participated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 35 Great effort was put into recruiting and obtaining responses from the pregnant women, and no exclusion criteria were used in recruitment. 35 A recruitment bias might be present, as the GPs might not have recruited all available women, and women who did not read Danish well might not have participated. This deviation from a representative sample of pregnant women in Denmark affects prevalence data but should not affect the studied associations between symptoms and outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%